Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

StarCraft Heart of Swarm rMBP OS X vs BootCamp

R

renosausage

macrumors regular
Original poster
Sep 22, 2012
158
0
I am currently playing StarCraft 2 Heart of Swarm on my Base Model 15" Retina Macbook Pro

Nvidia 650m
8 gigs Ram
2.3 Ghz CPU

I have the settings all the way to max including the resolution at 2880 by 1800

Now at this setting I only get around 10 FPS which is obviously unplayable.

My question is would Windows 7 through BOOTCAMP increase my FPS for this game?

I want to test it myself, but I'll have to buy a copy of Windows 7 and download Starcraft 2 all over again.

I want to know if its worth the time. Thank You for your help.
 
M

MacKid

macrumors 6502
Jan 1, 2003
405
84
The conventional wisdom is that with Blizzard games, it's usually an FPS difference of about 15%. You are almost guaranteed to see better performance in Windows, but it's not going to turn 10 FPS into 40.

The 650M chokes on Wings of Liberty at 2880 (full resolution with everything maxed is like 17 - 19 FPS), and I believe they improved the physics/water/creep even further for HOTS. I'd suggest starting by cutting the resolution as much as you're comfortable with, and then dialing back the fringe/shiny features like terrain and lighting.
 
dusk007

dusk007

macrumors 68040
Dec 5, 2009
3,411
104
I never tried installing it in bootcamp as I find it convenient that for once I don't have to restart. I did play WoL for a few weeks before and that ran more easily.
Now I turned physics completely off and particles as far down as possible and in heated matches with lots of units it lows down to 10fps and lower and becomes really annoying because that is exactly when you cannot deal with jittery in the game. My micro is then just useless late game. Practically none existent.
It seems to me to be CPU related as turning down GPU settings doesn't fix it. I think HoTs is a bit broken on Mac in some way there.

Windows will almost certainly get more attention and not have the problem. Also you get the vastly superior Windows GPU drivers. I run on a 2010 Mac though with a 650M just turn down a few settings. The difference between high and max is virtually unidentifiable IMO.

I only read a thread about beta performance on Mac which was said to be horrible and lacking quite a bit of optimization and bug fixes. Mac gamers are just to few in number and there is always the convenient excuse that Mac GPU drivers suck anyway so why bother with too much effort.
 
B

Barhen

macrumors member
Mar 20, 2013
55
0
You are asking for a lot to run a game in that resolution with all the eye candy.. especially on a laptop no matter how expensive it was. I don't even bother bootcamp since all the games i play already have a mac version..

I play the resolution above best retina setting,, which is 1600x1080 i believe... looks great on high settings... perfect resolution for gaming imo.

If bootcamp gives slightly better frame rate and better graphic support, thats great, I am keeping an eye on this thread.
 
Schranke

Schranke

macrumors 6502a
Apr 3, 2010
974
1,072
Copenhagen, Denmark
I am running HotS on something near the build in most space setting on my rMBP.
i have all settings on high, and have a somewhat smooth frame rate of ~60
the full resolution of the rMBP is a far reach on a new game with everthing on max.
As for windows, i do not care since i do not like to use the space just to get a little bit better fps for something i do caual
 
R

renosausage

macrumors regular
Original poster
Sep 22, 2012
158
0
Well...

I also have Diablo 3 which runs perfectly at 2880 by 1800 resolution. I also have the settings on max too.

My connection seems to make a slight difference FPS, but I figured since StarCraft 2 Heart of the Swarm was also made by Blizzard that the 2880 by 1800 would be fine.

It looks so awesome at the highest settings. I hate the fact that I cannot enjoy it with high FPS.

Would the difference between Diablo 3 and Starcraft 2 Heart of Swarm be in the software build?

I can remember Diablo 3 being specifically advertised as "retina ready" when it came out.

Why would Starcraft not be like this?
 
M

MacKid

macrumors 6502
Jan 1, 2003
405
84
renosausage said:
I can remember Diablo 3 being specifically advertised as "retina ready" when it came out.

Why would Starcraft not be like this?
Click to expand...

All games are "Retina ready" in the sense that you can set resolution to whatever you want. It's not a comment on performance, it's the idea that some game developers may elect to add higher-resolution artwork (i.e., UI elements, maps, etc.) for when you're playing at max resolution.
 
Schranke

Schranke

macrumors 6502a
Apr 3, 2010
974
1,072
Copenhagen, Denmark
Diablo 3 do not have to render so many things.
The build and engine are wery difrent.
you can not compare d3 and hots since the engine they run on is not the same.
 
S

swerve147

macrumors 6502a
Jan 12, 2013
837
114
renosausage said:
around 35 fps which is fine for me. It only slows down when there is a lot of things going on, but I noticed using my colleges wifi it is smooth throughout.
Click to expand...

Thanks. Sounds like you're getting pretty much what is expected from D3 for our MacBooks. If you look at the typical benchmarking sites like notebookcheck it looks like HotS is significantly more demanding than D3 for whatever reason. Approximately half D3's fps at ultra settings (and this is in Windows).
 
C

Cassadian

macrumors regular
Sep 4, 2012
140
0
Wow, I'm impressed. I only get 10-20 FPS on Low settings at 1440 x 880 (or whatever) on OSX with my rMBP base model. I must be doing something wrong...
 
B

Barhen

macrumors member
Mar 20, 2013
55
0
Cassadian said:
Wow, I'm impressed. I only get 10-20 FPS on Low settings at 1440 x 880 (or whatever) on OSX with my rMBP base model. I must be doing something wrong...
Click to expand...

is this with the 15" and discrete graphic card running? that is odd, if not..then thats normal for the integrated 4000
 
S

Serban

Suspended
Jan 8, 2013
5,159
928
swerve147 said:
Thanks. Sounds like you're getting pretty much what is expected from D3 for our MacBooks. If you look at the typical benchmarking sites like notebookcheck it looks like HotS is significantly more demanding than D3 for whatever reason. Approximately half D3's fps at ultra settings (and this is in Windows).
Click to expand...

The fps on notebookcheck is the average fps..so in HOTS when you start the game you can have even over 80fps but in mid game/fights in matches like 3v3 or 4v4 with over 300 units rendering you get 30fps. So the average is like 45fps.
 
F

Freyqq

macrumors 601
Dec 13, 2004
4,038
181
renosausage said:
I am currently playing StarCraft 2 Heart of Swarm on my Base Model 15" Retina Macbook Pro

Nvidia 650m
8 gigs Ram
2.3 Ghz CPU

I have the settings all the way to max including the resolution at 2880 by 1800

Now at this setting I only get around 10 FPS which is obviously unplayable.

My question is would Windows 7 through BOOTCAMP increase my FPS for this game?

I want to test it myself, but I'll have to buy a copy of Windows 7 and download Starcraft 2 all over again.

I want to know if its worth the time. Thank You for your help.
Click to expand...

put it on 1440x900 and it'll run fine
 
R

renosausage

macrumors regular
Original poster
Sep 22, 2012
158
0
Freyqq said:
put it on 1440x900 and it'll run fine
Click to expand...

Thats currently how I'm playing now under the OSX system.

I just really wish I could run it at 2880 by 1800 with full graphics.

It looks so beautiful and crisp at that resolution.

I wish I could some rig up another GPU to my rMBP through the Thunderbolt Port.

Considering the speed of the Thunderbolt port that would not be impossible, I guess you would just have to beg Apple to support the card with drivers :-(
 
R

renosausage

macrumors regular
Original poster
Sep 22, 2012
158
0
Okay so I compared the difference between the two operating systems.

OSX 10.8.3 and Windows 7

I updated both to the most recent updates and I also downloaded the Nvidia Experience App for PC and used the latest drivers.

Heres my data:

Mac OSX 10.8.3 At full 2880 by 1800 with every thing maxed out I averaged 7 fps. This was obviously impossible to play.

Windows 7 at full 2880 by 1800 with everything maxed out I averaged 13 fps.

So, Windows 7 does give you a boost but at 2880 by 1800 with everything maxed out it still is not enough to consider the game playable.

Finally, Mac OSX 10.8.3 1440 by 900 with everything maxed outI averaged 48 fps.

Windows 7 at 1440 by 900 with everything maxed out I averaged 63 fps.

I reinstalled Heart of Swarm on my Mac and reset the SMC and Pram. This increases my fps by 8. Using 1440 by 900 with everything maxed out.

I also set my display settings to 1440 by 900 instead of best for retina. This made no difference in fps.

I also tried turning off Graphics Switching but this made no difference either.

In conclusion, The Windows & version obviously gives greater fps. Windows 7 also has a greater variety of games to play too.

Two things that would make my experience better:

Well first considering the fact that using the 1440 by 900 resolution is my only option, it would be better for me to invest in a 21 inch 1080p monitor and play the games from there.

Secondly, I need to upgrade to Windows 8 and test these games from there.
 
dusk007

dusk007

macrumors 68040
Dec 5, 2009
3,411
104
Would be interesting if WoL would be any different.
Maybe you could try running some WoL replay.

Generally that looks like about the best one can expect. Other games have much bigger differences not just in speed but also quality. Civ V being the worst which gets you about 1 fps on mac at settings it runs fine at 20-25 in windows.
 
C

Cassadian

macrumors regular
Sep 4, 2012
140
0
Barhen said:
is this with the 15" and discrete graphic card running? that is odd, if not..then thats normal for the integrated 4000
Click to expand...

Yes and yes. It is odd, Apple store admitted this the first time after a failed hardware test (by this I mean I passed the hardware test) and the realization that my FPS was far too low (and this took a bit of arguing, sigh). Afterwards I replaced the laptop and it still is sucky.
 
B

Barhen

macrumors member
Mar 20, 2013
55
0
Cassadian said:
Yes and yes. It is odd, Apple store admitted this the first time after a failed hardware test (by this I mean I passed the hardware test) and the realization that my FPS was far too low (and this took a bit of arguing, sigh). Afterwards I replaced the laptop and it still is sucky.
Click to expand...

dont know what to tell you, i run the same setup as you do and get much better results with higher settings.
 
Zeov

Zeov

macrumors 6502a
Apr 1, 2011
634
113
Odense
you're pushing the 650m way too much using max resolution.. this isn't a 680m you know :D
 
S

swerve147

macrumors 6502a
Jan 12, 2013
837
114
Cassadian said:
Yes and yes. It is odd, Apple store admitted this the first time after a failed hardware test (by this I mean I passed the hardware test) and the realization that my FPS was far too low (and this took a bit of arguing, sigh). Afterwards I replaced the laptop and it still is sucky.
Click to expand...

Assuming you did all the oft-repeated troubleshooting steps (reset SMC/PRAM)? 10.8.3 and the latest SMC update 1.1 installed?
 
C

Cassadian

macrumors regular
Sep 4, 2012
140
0
Barhen said:
dont know what to tell you, i run the same setup as you do and get much better results with higher settings.
Click to expand...

I don't know what to tell myself either. Apple can't help me, I can't help me, it seems no one has solutions.

swerve147 said:
Assuming you did all the oft-repeated troubleshooting steps (reset SMC/PRAM)? 10.8.3 and the latest SMC update 1.1 installed?
Click to expand...

I've done it many times (even reset NVRAM/PRAM and ran hardware tests).

But I don't mean to de-rail this thread.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom